Assessment of Educational Status of Periodontics and Oral Health and Community Dentistry Departments in Yazd Dental School Using CIPP Model in 2018

Fahimeh  Rashidi Maybodi; Ameneh  Hosseini-Yekani; Nafiseh Golshahi

doi:10.18502/ssu.v29i8.7665

Fahimeh Rashidi Maybodi Department of Periodontics. School of Dentistry. Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Ameneh Hosseini-Yekani Department of Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
Nafiseh Golshahi General Dentist

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ssu.v29i8.7665

Keywords: Dental education, Periodontics, Dental Public Health and Community Dentistry, CIPP Evaluation Model

Abstract

Introduction: Considering the changes, which implemented in the dental education program in recent years and also the importance of reviewing their feedback in educational affairs, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the periodontics and dental public health departments of Dental School based on the CIPP evaluation model in 2018.

Methods: The present study was performed in a descriptive cross-sectional format on the target population of dental students of 10-12 semesters and professors of the mentioned groups. Context, input, process and product were assessed using a questionnaire consistent with the CIPP pattern checklist. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and T-test via SPSS 16 software.

Results: The average scores of professors and students in different areas of the Periodontology Department were as followed: the context (75, 58.6); input (18.9, 1.37); process (68.7, 8.37) and product (56.2, 1.37) fields, respectively. In the Dental Public Health Department, the average scores also included context (50, 3.64); input (25, 5.63); process (100, 58) and product (75, 3.58) areas, respectively.

Conclusion: In the Department of Periodontics, the input as well as process and output were undesirable for the students and the input was undesirable for the professors. In the Dental Public Health Department, just input was unfavorable for professors and relatively desirable for students in all four areas.